DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 20370-5100
SJN
Docket No: 06371-10
11 April 2011
This is in reference to your application for correction of your
naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United
States Code, section 1552.
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval
Records, sitting in executive session, considered your
application on 5 April 2011. Your allegations of error and
injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative
regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this
Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of
your application, together with all material submitted in support
thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations,
and policies.
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire
record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient
to establish the existence of probable material error or
iim wetice.
You reenlisted in the Navy on 9 November 1950, after serving over
three years of honorable service. The Board found that you
received two captain’s masts (CM) for two periods of unauthorized
absence (UA), and were convicted by summary court-martial of UA.
On 31 January 1952, you submitted a statement about your
involvement in committing a homosexual act and three
specifications of sodomy. Subsequently, you submitted a written
request for a good of the service discharge in order to avoid
trial by court-martial. Prior to submitting this request for
discharge, you conferred with a qualified military lawyer, were
advised of your rights, and were warned of the probable adverse
consequences of accepting such a discharge. Your request for
discharge was granted and on 19 March 1952, you received an other
than honorable discharge for the good of the service in lieu of
trial by court-martial. As a result of this action, you were
spared the stigma of a court-martial conviction and the potential
penalties of a punitive discharge and confinement at hard labor.
The Board, in its review of your application, carefully weighed
all potentially mitigating factors, such as your youth and prior
honorable service. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these
factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your
discharge given your two CM’s, conviction by SCM, charges being
preferred to a court-martial for very serious offenses, and
request for discharge. The Board believed that considerable
clemency was extended to you when your request for discharge was
approved. The Board also concluded that you received the benefit
ofyour bargain with the Navy when your request for discharge was
granted and should not be permitted to change it now.
Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and
votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.
It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that
Favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the
Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material
evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board.
In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a
presumption of regularity attaches to all official records.
Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval
record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the
existence of probable material error or injustice.
Sincerely,
NAVY | BCNR | CY2006 | 09613-06
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies.After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.On 15 July 1948 you enlisted in the Navy at age 18. On 19 September 1952 you received CM for throwing...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 07933-00
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 10 April 2001. injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. On 29 July 1952 you submitted a written request for an undesirable discharge in order to avoid trial by court-martial for participating in homosexual acts. Your request was granted on 16 August 1952 and as a result...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 08650-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 14 June 2011. Furthermore, the Board believed that considerable leniency was extended to you to allow you to be separated at the end of your obligated service with a general discharge instead of a lesser Gischarge due to ae of misconduct. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2003 | 01453-03
About a year later, on 6 October 1950, you received captain's mast (CM) for drunkenness and not having an identification or liberty card. On 9 October 1952 the recommendation was approved, and you received the undesirable discharge on 22 October 1952. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 12122-10
After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice. Nevertheless, the Board concluded these factors were not sufficient to warrant recharacterization of your discharge given your two NUP’s, conviction by SPCM of a lengthy period of UA, and your request for discharge to avoid trial for a period of UA lasting over 15 months. Consequently, when applying...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2001 | 05355-01
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies. The Navy Board of Review affirmed the findings and Thereafter, you were not recom- On 30 April 1952 you received a third NJP for two periods of UA from 14-22 March and 29 March to 3 April 1952. bad conduct discharge on 5 May 1952. concluded that the foregoing factors and contentions...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 07458-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 13 April 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 03027-10
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. AS & result, on 19 March 1975, you submitted a written request for an other than honorable discharge in order to avoid trial by court- martial for the three foregoing periods of UA totalling 376 days. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2002 | 07134-00
Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record, and applicable statutes, regulations, and policies. Your record further reflects that on 19 May 1954 you were convicted by summary court-martial (SCM) of an eight day period of UA and sentenced to hard labor for 15 days, a $10 forfeiture of On 9 September 1954, while in a UA status, you were apprehended by civil authorities for temporary...
NAVY | BCNR | CY2010 | 11864-10
A three-member panel of the Board for Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 2 August 2011. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable Statutes, regulations and policies. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable...